A latent global non-cognitive factor predicts a latent three-year GPA factor, explaining 27–29% of its variance¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Two nested SEMs, with a latent non-cognitive predictor regressed on a latent GPA factor, each showed good fit and explained 27–29% of GPA variance. → Juan-Carlos Pérez-González 2022

Evidence¶

Juan-Carlos Pérez-González 2022¶

Juan-Carlos Pérez-González, Gemma Filella, Anna Soldevila, Yasmine Faiad, Maria-Jose Sanchez-Ruiz. (2022). Integrating self-regulated learning and individual differences in the prediction of university academic achievement across a three-year-long degree. Metacognition and Learning (2022) 17:1141–1165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-022-09315-w

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Comparison of the two fitted SEMs (n = 386): the theory-driven MABC model (Model 1) explained 29% of latent GPA variance with PCFI = 0.49; the narrower MA model explained 27% with PCFI = 0.42. Both showed good fit on RMSEA, TLI and CFI.

"Model 1 showed greater explanatory power (29% of the variance) vs. Model 2 (27% of the variance), as well as slightly higher level of parsimony (Model 1’s PCFI = 0.49 vs. Model 2’s PCFI = 0.42)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• A reduced set of non-cognitive factors alone explains 17–25% of the variance in university GPA across three years of a degree
• Previous academic performance is the strongest predictor of university GPA, and adding cognitive predictors raises explained variance to about 44–50%
• Academic engagement and regulation of behavior and context show incremental validity over cognitive predictors of university GPA — related
• Trait emotional intelligence showed no significant association with university GPA, despite correlating with engagement, SRL strategies and self-efficacy — related